This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug bootstrap/44921] [4.6 Regression] Failed to bootstrap
- From: "jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 13 Jul 2010 09:51:12 -0000
- Subject: [Bug bootstrap/44921] [4.6 Regression] Failed to bootstrap
- References: <bug-44921-682@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #7 from amylaar at spamcop dot net 2010-07-13 01:55 -------
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] Failed to bootstrap
Quoting hjl dot tools at gmail dot com <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>:
> Maybe
>
> int min_regno = 0;
>
> is faster.
Considering performance, your first patch was better - it avoids a call to
rtx_cost when no optimization can be performed. OTOH with the expensive
loop through all hard registers that's in the noise.
Or compared to the cycles wasted on failed bootstraps or this discussion ;-)
------- Comment #8 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-13 09:51 -------
Created an attachment (id=21189)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21189&action=view)
The test case
The test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44921